Re: [Pce] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6-17.txt

Hi PCE,
(The previous email was sent too fast, fixed some syntax errors and resend)

This update addressed the comments from Adrian, Ran Chen and Yingzhen. Many thanks to their valuable comments[1], please review and confirm, thanks!
This update also tries to address the comments from Ketan. We believe that we have addressed the editorial comments from Ketan[1]. 

Till now, we may have two reserved comments to be addressed:
1. IANA allocation of SRv6-ERO(From Adrian): Should we create a new registry for SR/SRv6?  or allocate them from the RSVP parameters registry? Comments are welcome.
2. X-flag(From Ketan): is the X-flag needed? If not, why? if we decide to delete it, we need to know from the WG that if anyone has implemented it, and how can we handle the compatibility problem.

Comments and feedbacks are appreciated.

Respect,
Cheng

[1]. https://github.com/muzixing/IETF-PCEP-SRV6/issues

-----Original Message-----
From: Pce <pce-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Cheng Li
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2023 10:42 AM
To: pce@ietf.org; Mahendra Negi <mahend.ietf@gmail.com>; Mahendra Singh Negi <mahend.ietf@gmail.com>; Mike Koldychev <mkoldych@cisco.com>; Prejeeth Kaladharan <prejeeth@rtbrick.com>; Siva Sivabalan <msiva282@gmail.com>; Yongqing Zhu <zhuyq8@chinatelecom.cn>; Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.ietf@gmail.com>; adrian@olddog.co.uk; yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com; chen.ran@zte.com.cn
Subject: Re: [Pce] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6-17.txt

Hi PCE,

This update addressed the comments from Adrian, Ran Chen and Yingzhen. Many thanks to their valuable comments[1], please review and confirm, thanks!
This update also try to address the comments from Ketan. We believe that we have addressed the editorial from Ketan[1]. 

Till now, we may have two reserved comments to be addressed:

1. IANA allocation of SRv6-ERO(From Adrian): Should we create a new registry for SR/SRv6 or allocate in from the RSVP parameters registry? Comments are welcome.
2. X-flag(From Ketan): is the X-flag needed? If not, why? if we decide to delete it, we need to know from the WG that if anyone has implemented it, and how can we handle the compatibility problem.

Comments and feedback are appreciated.

Respect,
Cheng

[1]. https://github.com/muzixing/IETF-PCEP-SRV6/issues

-----Original Message-----
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org <internet-drafts@ietf.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2023 10:29 AM
To: Cheng Li <c.l@huawei.com>; Cheng Li <c.l@huawei.com>; Mahendra Negi <mahend.ietf@gmail.com>; Mahendra Singh Negi <mahend.ietf@gmail.com>; Mike Koldychev <mkoldych@cisco.com>; Prejeeth Kaladharan <prejeeth@rtbrick.com>; Siva Sivabalan <msiva282@gmail.com>; Yongqing Zhu <zhuyq8@chinatelecom.cn>
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6-17.txt

A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6-17.txt
has been successfully submitted by Cheng Li(Editor) and posted to the IETF repository.

Name:		draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6
Revision:	17
Title:		Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Segment Routing leveraging the IPv6 dataplane
Document date:	2023-06-28
Group:		pce
Pages:		26
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6-17.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6/
Html:           https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6-17.html
Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6
Diff:           https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6-17

Abstract:
   Segment Routing (SR) can be used to steer packets through an IPv6 or
   MPLS network using the source routing paradigm.  SR enables any head-
   end node to select any path without relying on a hop-by-hop signaling
   technique (e.g., LDP or RSVP-TE).

   A Segment Routed Path can be derived from a variety of mechanisms,
   including an IGP Shortest Path Tree (SPT), explicit configuration, or
   a PCE.

   Since SR can be applied to both MPLS and IPv6 forwarding planes, a
   PCE should be able to compute SR-Path for both MPLS and IPv6
   forwarding planes.  The PCEP extension and mechanisms to support SR-
   MPLS have been defined.  This document describes the extensions
   required for SR support for IPv6 data plane in the Path Computation
   Element communication Protocol(PCEP).

The IETF Secretariat

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce